As a beginning tech in the early 1990's, I appreciated the built in onboard diagnostic system. It was way ahead of it's time. "Off + Warmer" gave you a whole lot of information at no cost.
Definitely! Were same era as I also got in the field around 89. Crazy to think back to how much the ecm stuff was diy.... GMs grounding the ALDL and Ford was a little more work, but could also get the codes without a scan tool! Until I really got going in Smog and driveability in early 90s and bought a Snap on MT 2500! So primitive compared to now, but was a game changer back then (especially with diagnosing imports).
As a teenager, I had the opportunity to buy a 92 Seville STS, but turned my nose up to it when I found out it was "only" the 4.9 and not the Northstar. That thing probably would have been a great car that could have served me for years, but instead I got an unreliable 96 Contour 4 cylinder. I was an idiot.
There's plenty else to go wrong on that cadillac, so you probably wouldn't have exactly come out ahead with that choice. But you probably would have had more fun in between repairs lol.
@@DrewLSsix We'll never know, but that Contour I got instead was one of the least reliable vehicles I've owned. About the only upside was that it got 25MPG regardless of how I drove it... The Caddy would definitely have been in the teens with the lead foot I had.
Had a 93 Seville with the 4.9!! Great car and engine! Was so much fun to drive and got very good fuel economy for a v8 car. Interstate driving I could get 28 without much work. 22-25 was pretty common!
Easiest way to replace the water pump is to remove the battery, remove the reservoir, remove the upper engine dog bone mounts, and remove the lower fasteners on the lower engine mounts (bottom of the engine cradle). Then use a floor jack with a block of wood on the passenger side of the oil pan and jack the engine up. You will get several inches out of it to where all the water pump fasteners will be above the passenger side frame rail. Now, soak the heck out of all the fasteners with good penetrating oil and carefully use hand tools to remove everything, especially the 10mm nuts. Those nuts are threaded on to studs that are part of the timing cover. If they break, the timing cover and gasket will need to be replaced.
This, this, a million times, this. Unbolt the motor mounts and hoist the motor from the passenger side on these 4.9s. That pump was EZ-PZ once you figure that out.
My Mom is now 90 and to this day of all her Cadillacs her 1988 Deville with the 4.5 is her very favorite. Not my Dads. He’s gone now and loved his 1978 Fleetwood. To Mom the 88 Deville was truly special.
@@kennyclark284I know that color. Antelope was an extra cost exterior color. Had to pay extra for it if i'm not mistaken. Triple Antelope must have looked stunning.
@@JoJoStar22 I like the 1989-1993. They get all the fanfare because they brought back the more pronounced "fins" in the back. They are a nice car and they brought back the Fleetwood coupe during those years which is the most rare of that generation. But i still like the 1988 model year slightly better. The more boxy look says, "Cadillac Traditionalist" to me.
My late Mother had a 1993 polo green Seville with this engine in it, and that car would haul booty 😅. Handled really well too for a car its size. Really miss that Seville; miss my Mom more.
Recently put a '91 Seville STS my father passed down to me in the shop. Would much rather have had him the past 18 years, but I suppose he'd be happy knowing I still got it
Being a Cadillac tech at a dealership in the 1990's I can confirm that the 4.5 and 4.9 were lightyears ahead of the 4.1. But I can remember driving Allante's before the Northstar was released. The 4.5 ran really well in those cars. I once had a Seville with a 4.1 that was leaking coolant between the engine and transmission. I assumed it was a freeze plug that couldn't be seen. After removing the transaxle to gain access I realized it wasn't a freeze plug. Turns out the block had rotted through, probably due to electrolysis that was quite common in the early days of aluminum blocks. So the car got a brand new GM engine.
I think they got it almost perfect with the 4.9. As far as I’m concerned, the Northstar was several steps backwards. Yes, it was a lot more powerful. But they took several steps backwards as far as reliability. It was more reliable than the 4100, But not by much in my opinion.
My grandmother had a 1984 Seville that she bought new, that had this problem with not very many miles. it happened on a 300mi road trip. The car had to be towed a long way to the nearest dealer for a new engine. Other than alternator issues later in its life, it ran fine until the day it was sold in 1997-1998. It was a turd though. I agree that the 4.9L was a much nicer running engine. We had other family members who had DeVilles with either the 4.5 or the 4.9 and they were quick, especially the 4.9. At the time, it seemed like there wasn't much on the road that could jump these things off the line.
By the time the 4.9 came around, Cadillac had alienated so many of their loyal customers and damaged their reputation so bad that few would ever consider buying Cadillac or any other GM mark. My family has not purchased a GM car since the 1983 Cadillac Deville
Have you tried the Cadillac CT5 V series ? They've come a long way since the dark days of the early 1980s.. Of course, they also beg the question of are they really a Cadillac or not? Certainly not in the traditional sense.
When I was a kid working as a car jockey at a Caddy dealer in Toronto back in the 90s, I remember a Deville came through with the hood ornament moved to a grille badge. I learned it was a Touring Sedan, and I thought, who the heck would buy one of those? Then 3 years ago I found one and bought it. Drove back and forth across the country, great cruiser and love the old 4.9 in it. Every time I think about selling it I go and drive it. And watch Adam's videos 🙂
These days, this motor is often used by customizers of Pontiac Fieros. The mounting points and a lot of the hook ups are the same as the 2.8 V6 so doing a conversion in a Fiero is very easy and it transforms the little car, giving it a lot of extra power.
A bit of extra power, but mostly it's for the noise they make. It's pretty well accepted that the 3800s/c is your best choice for cheap power in a fiero. The smaller V6s will match or exceed the 4.9 in power but will take a significant investment, the other V8s (chevy 5.0/5.7 and LS essentially) will beat it in power both stock and with easy mods but that swap is a significant effort in its own right. The caddy is close to drop in, cheap to buy, and makes a really good sound along with decent power. It also doesn't screw with the handling at all so that's a plus. If there was a top end package that fixed the engines breathing problems it just might be a real performance engine, but it would be a tough sell considering the folks that love these things typically love them for being cheap. They probably won't flock to buy a $3k head/intake package just to break 300hp lol.
I've owned a '91 Seville with the 4.9 engine in it. Easy to work on and had good power. I remember having to change the water pump on it before I had to make a out of town trip. It wasn't difficult at all to me. The biggest pain was that the pump was held to the block with 10 small bolts (can't remember the size). The serpentine belt was easy to remove also. I wouldn't hesitate to buy another Cadillac with the 4.9 in it (as long as it was properly maintained).
I will say that in my 1997 Seville, I addressed the 4.6L Northstar head gasket issue by installing head studs instead of bolts. It's got 224k on it now and it still runs strong. The only major problem I had is oil leaks from the girdle and pan and also I can't find certain body and suspension bushings because they're not made anymore. I might have to make my own.
As a GM dealer tech in the 90s, I agree mostly with your assessment of this engine. They seemed to be worlds better than the 4.1, however, the 440T4/4T60 transmissions did not live a long life attached to the 4.9.
I had an 82 Fleetwood Brougham delagance with a goodwrench 4100 replacement engine. It was very reliable and great on gas but very slow. I also had a 93 sedan Deville. It was very easy to service and it moved quite swiftly. I did have a lot of trouble fixing a fast idle problem. My wife is still upset that I sold it and I regret selling it as well.
Thank you, Adam, I was afraid to tell people that I drove a Pre-Northstar Allante and it ran beautifully... It's also good to see someone mentioning the truly "on-board" diagnostics that Cadillac began in 1980. (Of course, the big question is why no one else did it!)
I drive a 1986 Cadillac Sedan DeVille with the 4.1, I bought it from an older gentleman and it only has 60,000 miles on it. I haven't had a single issue and it's very smooth and quiet. It may not have the 4.5 or 4.9 version of the engine but if well taken care of the 4.1 will last many more years to come!
The 91-93 cars with the 4.9L are really underrated. Screwed together nice, surprisingly competent when pushed and sublime for eating up highway miles. While power is lower than the Northstars, the 4.9 was no slouch with a nice economy and a grunty powerband. Looking at getting another. While the last gen DTS is a great spiritual successor to the 91-93, there's just something special about the old 4.9 cars
I remember these 4.9L motors in the small Seville and it was a very hot car. It would smoke the front tires easily, it would pull hard on the top end and also made very nice sounds. definitely felt like more than 200hp. at the time....
Thank you Adam. I liked the video. This is the V8 from Cadillac I thought was great and reliable. I liked how they improved the engine and made the changes. Too bad it was not around in the early 1980's. This engine was the era of "Cadillac Style". The engine was not a gas guzzlers. The only thing I did not care for is it required premium fuel. They should have ran this engine a little longer until they perfected the Northstar V8 and then brought the Northstar V8 out. It is nice to know that it is easy to service as well. I had heard a rumor that they were thinking about giving this engine to Oldsmobile and putting it in the Ninety Eight. I do not know how true this rumor is... I rode in Cadillacs that had this engine. It has some really good pickup too. Very excellent video.
I had a 1994 sedan DeVille with the 4.9, in the extremely rare medium blue metallic with dark blue leather. It was an absolutely beautiful car, a rocketship on the highway and as comfortable as anything I've driven to this day. I never should have let the ex wife keep it... She killed it within a year through sheer stupidity.
I have a 90 fleetwood with 4.5. You finally explained my unintended acceleration (which a mechanic fixed a few years back). Also spent $$$ on injectors and did water pump. And prob other stuff. But for me it is worth it for a lovely driving car with much better space and driving dynamics than the RWD caddies of the time. Wonderful ride and lots of space.
During Cash For Clunkers, I was a porter at a Chevy store. After the clunkers had their oil replaced with sodium silicate, it was my job to take the car out back, and rev the engine until it died. Most engines lasted 30 seconds or less. I got in a '94 Deville one day, real shame that was its fate, was a real pretty, clean car. It set the record, lasting about 3 minutes of the engine bouncing off the rev limiter before seizing up.
I could never do that!!!!! I’m a professional mechanic sinds 1996, and stil a real mechanic fix en build it!!! Not destroying!!! It must be something American to destroy everything even the good stuff!
In 1994, my wife and I married...and we discussed hiring a limo for the evening. We had a bunch of relatives visiting from out of town. We had a Grand Am and a Sentra...so I checked and a rental agency had a weekend special rate on a 1994 Cadillac Deville which was cheaper than renting a limo. We used the Deville to transport relatives to and from the airport, hotels and as our wedding car. As we were driving the car, my brother asked about the engine in the car, after watching commercials about the new Northstar V8s. So we popped the hood and our rental had the 4.9 V8. It had a nice subdued throaty rumble and plenty of power and the car was immensely comfortable. We enjoyed the car and really did a great job as a shuttle.
I bought a used 91 Eldorado with this engine about ten years old, from the original owner. That was a great engine, and a great riding car. The only component I recall replacing was the alternator. The only other issues I really had were with minor accessories and the VATS system.
@@br549200 Sure you can. The 3800 with a supercharger.. For that class.. But a Cadillac really needs a V8.. It's iconic for Cadillac and it's their history.. Cadillacs have used V8 (or V12 or V16) exclusively since 1915. At least until the Cimarron came along.
@@MarinCipollina yip, in the late 90’s I worked at the GM plant that built the Grand Prixs. (KC Kansas). We built a bunch of the super charged cars. They were extra peppy.
@kevinbarry71. I assume the aluminum block was to save weight. Iron heads tend to make more power, and be more efficient because the extra heat in them atomizes fuel better. Just a guess.
@@RichMander1 I doubt it. One of the main reasons cars have aluminum cylinder heads is aluminum transfers heat much better thus allowing hotter temperatures and more efficient and more powerful engines
I am rebuilding a 92 Deville with 42k miles now. Currently reupholstering my seats and clicked on your video. Just listening to your information was perfectly what I needed to understand what I have. Very clear and interesting thank you
I had a 92 eldorado with that motor. I bought it from the original owner. It had 180k miles but you would never know. Highschool car that took premium fuel. Wasn't to smart
My father had an '85 Eldorado, the 4.1 chucked its cam at about 85k, he traded for a weird looking '90 CDV, his last car b4 his passing in 1995. Now I own 2 5.7 diesel Caddys
I remember a friend of mine family bought a brand 1993 Cadillac sedan Deville. It was dark blue with a silver bottom. They previously drove a 1990 Buick Park Avenue. The Cadillac had such a presence. It was so smooth riding and seats were very comfortable. I have to say after owning a couple of Northstar equipped Cadillac I really want one now!
I have a 4.5 that I adore.....The only issue I have is the recurring Code 27....which can be annoying....IAC motors on these is a common issue. I believe quality control on the replacement motor has always been an issue. The blogs all hate these IAC motors. Mine has had all sensors replaced.... EGR.....Upper end pivots......it's a wonderfull engine overall....the on board diagnostics is amazing
After all the hits to Cadillac's reputation in the 80s, it's amazing that they didn't discover the Northstar was a timebomb, and when they did, they didn't fix it immediately instead of 12 years after its introduction. It's also amazing no one ratted out whoever was responsible and why, but it's ancient history now.
My personal opinion: the 4.9 was probably the best engine as far as combining power, and reliability. We know the 4100 was junk And the 4.5 was a lot better In reliability and power. But they finally got It almost perfect with the 4.9. Then they made the Northstar. It was admittedly a lot more powerful. But it returned back to the junk status as far as reliability goes.
My very first repair experience on one of these ever was a water pump. What an initiation. Very little space to get a ratchet on the bolts if at all, very hard to remove the bolts once you get them loose, and multiple sizes of bolts requiring multiple tools. Not to mention there were, like 16 bolts to remove in general. I had another with a very strange "stumble" on acceleration that was never repaired correctly after multiple attempts by multiple mechanics. EDIT: Oh, yeah, I forgot. NAPA charged me $145 for the water pump back in 2010(ish). I told them that didn't sound right. They told me it was because it was a Cadillac. I still don't believe them to this day. That was outrageous for a stamped sheetmetal water pump.
That was one of the GOOD things about the Northstar, it had an up-top water pump at the end of one camshaft that you remove with a special socket. So that was one job that wasn't made miserable by stuffing it under a tight hood sideways.
GM's HT series started off as total crap then gradually evolved into a fairly solid engine at which time GM cancelled production. GM's Northstar series started off as crap then evolved into a fairly good engine at which point GM cancelled production. Anyone see a pattern here?
Gm logic 1) have a decent idea. 2) bean counters cheap out. 3) rush production and pass issues to customer instead of solving it during r&r 4) finally get all the bugs worked out(by then the damage to reputation is done) 5) end production of said product.
And we all wondered why the Japanese took over the upscale automotive market in the 90s. They are still making essentially the same engines they did back then.
Yup… by the time GM works out the bugs they cannot overcome the (deserved) bad reputation and have to dump the product. Happened to the Vega which initially was a huge hit with buyers… Fiero, as well.
When Cadillac came out with the HT4100, why didn't they do things really different and possibly gotten way better results?? Bear with me here. Imagine that Cadillac used aluminum heads and block, actual gaskets and the heads were DOHC/4 Valves Per Cylinder with Port Fuel Injection? It would truly be a "High Technology 4100".
Good video. I picked up a mint 91 deville with 28000 on it with the 4.9. Runs good and is quite peppy. Glad to hear it was much improved from prior derivatives. My only gripe is the top mointed oil filter which makes changing oil very messy. There has to be a trick im not aware of.
I drove a Cadillac with the 4.9 liter V8 and a nice aftermarket exhaust, it was for sale by my neighbor at the time. That engine is great when it runs well. I have seen what happens when they do not run well, and it is sad they go to scrap.
man...everything you said about the 4.9 i totally agree with. my father loved his 1991 seville sts. i have to admit it was a little rocket ship off the line. he never had an issue with that engine. i do have to say i think the 4.1 which he had a few of, was a smoother, quieter engine but took about a week to get to 65 mph. it was so bad i remember when he had the cruise on in his '82 fleetwood the car would have to go into passing gear to get up the hill. lol
Thank you so much for recognizing this engine! I daily drive a 91 sedan deville with 70k and I love the car. However, it sat for about 10 years before I bought it so I've unfortunately had to do a waterpump, I have every oil leak imaginable, the new mains are going in soon .030 under (closest i i could find to what gms original fix at .032 undersize). The tps broke while i was replacing the injectors so theres that. Then there's the 4t60... overall great cars if maintained tho
My old buddy's grandmother had a 91 Seville with the 4.9 L. That thing would do huge burnouts all day, we just got our licenses . The car took it better than a Northstar would have.
Worked at GM dealerships back in the late 90s. Loved it when one of these came in or if we had one on the lot. Great power delivery.. Torque steer FTW!
the reason the 0-60 times were rather high for N* engines was the excessive wheelspin and aggressive traction control system. power was cut in half in first gear at full throttle, for example.
I suppose until I die, I will never understand GM screwing up the basics in such profound ways between 1970-ish (Vega) and 1988 (ending the Fiero after FINALLY getting it right), plus the various Cadillac engines and Cimarron. If they had only gotten it RIGHT by keeping things simple and only introducing technology after very, very thorough R&D, the Vega would've been a homerun. All Cadillacs, including the Cimarron, would be looked back upon fondly, same for the Oldsmobile Diesels.
I had experience with three Cadillacs during this period. 1st was a 1983 Seville. My dad bought it brand new for $30k +. Damn thing pissed coolant on the garage floor when he brought it home. Beautiful car...crappy motor. My dad had it about 1 yr. before selling it and buying mom a new Mercedes. Loved that car for over 10 years...until my dad passed. My mom moved to their second home...in South Dakota. At that time, there were NO Mercedes dealers outside of Minneapolis...350 miles away. Sold the Mercedes and bought her a 1994 Sedan de Ville with the 4.9 V8. Wonderful car...except for the electronic ride control. Nearest Cadillac dealer was a GM mega store (all GM brands), but had no techs on staff that knew Cadillacs or Corvettes. What I found out after the advent of the internet was GM had piss poor quality control, leading to poor grounding of painted surfaces...particularly in the trunk...where all of the suspension modules were located. No matter; mom pulled out in front of a 16 yo driver and totaled the Caddy. In an effort to avoid the ride control, bought her the final Fleetwood Brougham in 1996. This had the same LT1 that came in the Impala SS and Buick Roadmaster. Not a bad engine...except for the Optispark ignition unit, behind the water pump. Never had a Northstar, but heard nothing but complaints from other owners. I would say for the 25 yr period from early 80's to 2005, the 4.5 and 4.9s were the best engines, next to the 3800 V6s.
@@MarinCipollina Four WHOLE years? Today, it takes twice that long to pay a luxury car off. XLRs, long after 2003, still had issues with Northstar head bolts and such. And Toyota Camry owners expect at least 20 years from their cars.
I wouldn't say that an engine making north of 200 HP is only in performance cars, Mercedes had a 3.2 liter straight 6 that churned out power a bit above 200HP on their S320 and E320 cars, and a 5.0 V-8 that made above 300 HP, which was used in the S500.
Had 4 80s Coupe 4100's. 3 of which were lowrider cars, summer only. Just one failed, which I drove in the Minnesota winter a few times out of desperation when my fwd car was in the shop.
I thought these were disastrous engines from GM. If anyone says otherwise, I am not convinced. I can’t think of another bulletproof engine as GM’s 3.8 V6 and 2.8 V6.
The 4.9 was a pretty solid engine. GM worked the bugs out of the design and they were reliable. The 4.9 was and is much better than the current 3.6 V-6 that's found in so many GM cars. I think the 3.6 might be a worse engine than both the early 4100 and the Northstar.
The only problem with my 4.9 was I had to use a STP oil filter because it had a check valve. With the filter being up high on the engine the oil would drain down over night and the engine would knock when it was first started for a couple of seconds. One morning before starting the engine I removed the ac oil filter and noticed it had very little oil in it. So I did the same thing with the STP filter and it was full of oil an no more knocks. Sold the car with over 280000 miles on it and never had any problems with that engine.
I had a near mint pearl white with the moon roof 1992 Seville with the 4.9 and the car rode like dream. It never really gave me any big problems. Yes, i had to replace the water pump and after 100k miles valve covers had minor oil drip. I wish i never sold the car.
Ya know, the Northstar gets a bad rap because of the head gasket issue. Which is a shame, cause it's actually an extremely well-designed engine. Light, efficient, good power. And the head gasket issue CAN be fixed with an aftermarket head fastener solution. And if you replace the head fasteners, it's an absolutely rock-solid engine that you'll likely never have any major problems from again. I'm pretty sure there's a sandrail company in Cali that builds an 1100HP twin turbo sandrail using Northstars. It's also worth noting that GM did eventually fix the head gasket issue in the N*. Unfortunately, by that point, the damage was already done. It's too bad, really.
I did a water pump replacement job on a 4.9 (1991 Eldorado), not that bad as I remember. I sold the car because I found it uninspiring and also because of the oddity of the engine!
My Cadillac tech prefers the 4.9.....no knocks.....as you say.....don't dog any of them. My 88 with its T-440 hydrostatic performs well. I treat her right!
I really miss my 91 Coupe Deville, that engine was great, but I would like to know why the eat water pumps. Great ride and looked good and was way better than anything my friends had at the time, it was a faster than a lot of "sports' cars at the time too.
In 1991 for a wedding we rented a Caddy with the 4.9 and my friend rented a Toyota Supra. We decided to drag race for fun and the Caddy left the Supra way behind.
People rip on me for it. But my 4.5 200hp port injected in my alante (phase 2 car) seems to be treating me well. It drives real well and is very responsive. Between the engine and the lower bearing (lower than the sts) it goes quite well for the time in a small bit not really light car.
My best friend in high school had a black Eldorado with this motor, the Flowmaster 40 cross-flow muffler for a 3rd-gen F-body fit it perfectly and sounded AWESOME. I had a pretty hot 327 in a '78 El Camino with a 4-speed, but his car was widely regarded as 'cooler' by most of our friends, haha! They might've been dumbasses, but it was a fun, good-sounding car. We put a water pump on it, it was miserable, haha! The worst part was him totaling the car the next week, haha! It would idle in 'D' as fast as my El Camino would idle in 'R' (idle at 900 rpm). It would idle through 2nd, kinda crazy.
I have a 1995 4.9 Sedan Deville with about 121k on it. I don’t daily it of course but It’s been a really nice cruiser car. If there is a mechanic in Charlotte, NC area in the comments that works on these types of Cadillacs please let me know. It’s hard to find good mechanics or shops that are willing to work on these classics.
The water pump is super easy on 94-95 devilles vs the 91-93...there is a lot of subtle changes in each year of 4.9L the video didn't go over.they fixed the main bearing thump by 94... virtually non existent on 94-95... also sail on they called it which the car would accelerate on its own(barely)tho was from a bad idle control motor which works in tandem with throttle position sensor... you can't adjust them separately...simple fix is too replace the icm or spray silicone and clean the icm needle...and if you replace you have to keep the same screw length or else you screw up the tandem parameters of throttle position sensor which is set to the icm.
Every one of these I have seen has had a main bearing issue that causes the motor to tick. The tick steadily gets worse and worse and the car will sound like a diesel. However, my sister's cadillac with the 4.9 ran with this problem for 250,000 miles and was still running when my step dad got rid of it.
A better choice would be the XLR V Series with the supercharged 4.4 Liter Northstar engine, good for 443 HP and 414 ft lbs of torque. Brakes from the Corvette parts bin and weighs in at a rather svelte 3800 lbs. Plus it's rear wheel drive. 0 - 60 in 4.7 seconds, 1/4 mile in 13 seconds flat.
You would know better than me, did the 4.9 pfi ever come mated to a manual transmission? I would love a classic fwd cadillac with one of these engine and a manual
That's incorrect on the 4.9 it actually had 275 ft torque power not 270. 200 horse that's correct. I've owned these vehicles for a number of years, I actually have a '91 a '92 and a '93 Cadillac sedan DeVille with the 4.9.. never had a head gasket issues, I've owned my '92 Cadillac sedan DeVille for 20 years these are actually great engines minimal issues just your typical maintenance issues that's it, other than that excellent engine one of the best engines Cadillac ever made..💯👍🏼
